4 ms·

It’s not that much. It’s about 1600 hours of work which seems like the right amount taking on Uber and their lawyers. Also factor in the risk of working 1600 h

by 0xEFF 6y ago

It’s not that much. It’s about 1600 hours of work which seems like the right amount taking on Uber and their lawyers. Also factor in the risk of working 1600 hours and getting paid nothing for it if the case was lost.

tgv 6y ago
1600 hours is 9 months at 40hr/week. What's the risk they were taking? They wouldn't have taken the case if the risk of losing was high, so their E(X) was at least 250k.
- unionpivo 6y ago
  more like several people for couple of months. > What's the risk they were taking? They wouldn't have taken the case if the risk of losing was high? The fact the Uber has all the money in the world to hire good layers. And a motive to make it seem like its not directly them but their subcontractors problem, that is bigger than this single case. In such cases, there is no such thing as a sure thing.
- rtkwe 6y ago
  That math assumes one lawyer working on this which I doubt.
  - tgv 6y ago
    In my experience, they always report total number of hours worked. That's what they bill.
- AdamJacobMuller 6y ago
  > They wouldn't have taken the case if the risk of losing was high Depends how you define high. 75% chance of winning is still a 25% chance of the lawyers walking away with nothing. Lawyers who operate like this are effectively making a calculated investment of their own time (which could be money from paying clients) as well as associate and support time (which is money) and they do deserve to be compensated for their time and the investment must pay off above just directly time in (e.g. they have to be allowed to make profit here!). While I don't LOVE the proportions with 60% of the money going to the attorneys, I don't know enough about the case to judge it and there are remedies if the plaintiff thinks their attorneys are inflating expenses.
  - tgv 6y ago
    I've defined high as >= 30%, hence the expected win of .3 * 800k = 240k. That would still have been $150/hour.

by 0xEFF 6y ago

tgv 6y ago

1600 hours is 9 months at 40hr/week. What's the risk they were taking? They wouldn't have taken the case if the risk of losing was high, so their E(X) was at least 250k.

unionpivo 6y ago
more like several people for couple of months. > What's the risk they were taking? They wouldn't have taken the case if the risk of losing was high? The fact the Uber has all the money in the world to hire good layers. And a motive to make it seem like its not directly them but their subcontractors problem, that is bigger than this single case. In such cases, there is no such thing as a sure thing.
rtkwe 6y ago
That math assumes one lawyer working on this which I doubt.
- tgv 6y ago
  In my experience, they always report total number of hours worked. That's what they bill.
AdamJacobMuller 6y ago
> They wouldn't have taken the case if the risk of losing was high Depends how you define high. 75% chance of winning is still a 25% chance of the lawyers walking away with nothing. Lawyers who operate like this are effectively making a calculated investment of their own time (which could be money from paying clients) as well as associate and support time (which is money) and they do deserve to be compensated for their time and the investment must pay off above just directly time in (e.g. they have to be allowed to make profit here!). While I don't LOVE the proportions with 60% of the money going to the attorneys, I don't know enough about the case to judge it and there are remedies if the plaintiff thinks their attorneys are inflating expenses.
- tgv 6y ago
  I've defined high as >= 30%, hence the expected win of .3 * 800k = 240k. That would still have been $150/hour.